Wes wrote: All the negative rake on the turn of the last century battleships was because the bows were actually rams. The designers in those days weren't all that confident about gunfire against armor, and designed the potential for a ramming battle into the ships. Me: Do you know if this was ever tested??? It's hard to imagine riveted construction holding tight after being used to ram. Hope they included some monster pumps in the design! Just to pick nits, I noticed a couple of months ago that on the QCC "How long.." page, the Mariner Coaster was somewhat farther down the list than I expected to find a boat which is the first that comes to my mind when "short overhangs" are mentioned. The table lists it at 91%, while calculating from the figures on the Mariner web site gives 94%. Perhaps if *Cam* Broze was reading this list, this would have been mentioned earlier ;-) Mike Wagenbach *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Mike wrote: <SNIP> >>Just to pick nits, I noticed a couple of months ago that on the QCC "How long.." >page, the Mariner Coaster was somewhat farther down the list than I expected >to find a boat which is the first that comes to my mind when "short overhangs" >are mentioned. The table lists it at 91%, while calculating from the figures >on the Mariner web site gives 94%. Perhaps if *Cam* Broze was reading this >list, this would have been mentioned earlier ;-) >Mike Wagenbach With 250 lbs. aboard I get 96%. I think it depends on which load you are using to make the comparisons. With 150 lb. I get 93.6%. With 100 lb paddler. 91.3%. These are all using Sea Kayaker Magazines measurements 13' 5.25" and WL figures at the different weights (Note: except for a few typos--that are a foot off--Sea Kayaker's published numbers are far more accurate than from any other source I know of. I can't figure out where John Winters got the measurements for the Coaster at 13' 6" long with a 12.31' waterline. I assume he attempted to use the same gearload as the other kayaks listed. How about it John where did the Coaster data come from? Usually Sea Kayaker's first column of data is for 150 pounds but since the Coaster was used by many smaller paddlers they went down to 100 pounds for it in the review article. At first I suspected that a misreading of the Sea Kayaker numbers had caused the error, but the 100 pound WL listed by Sea Kayaker is 12.266' not 12.31 and the length was 13' 5.25" not 13' 6"? At one time I think Canoe & Kayaks buyers guide had the Coaster listed at 13' 6". I assume John will have the data for the Coaster on the QCC website corrected quickly. Thank you Mike for pointing it out. I checked a few of the other boats and there seem to be disparities in the Chinook (I get 97%, QCC 92%), Intrepid and Thunderbird data too? I looked at these because their designer Lee Moyer has a similar design philosophy concerning overhang as John Winters. Personally, I think the whole overall vs. waterline length issue is kind of a "red herring" when one is not talking about racing kayaks and rules regarding overall length. I like the freedom from any rules, but the sea's, one has when designing a sea kayak. What with all the overemphasis on waterline length going on among paddlers my customers are really surprised as well how fast and easy to paddle the 12-10 long Feathercraft K-Light is (as Ralph Diaz just pointed out in another recent post to paddlewise). The customers also expect that the K-Light won't track as well as it does either because of another misapplied piece of "common knowledge" ---that shorter doesn't track as well as longer. In actuality, shorter almost always turns easier than longer but when there is enough stern keel on the shorter kayak it can also track better as well as turn quicker than many longer kayaks. I know this seems to be a contradiction in terms but tracking and turning are not just opposite poles on the same continuum (as they are often though of). Matt Broze A more detailed discussion of waterline length exists in "FAQ" at http://www.marinerkayaks.com *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
> >With 250 lbs. aboard I get 96%. I think it depends on which load you are >using to make the comparisons. With 150 lb. I get 93.6%. With 100 lb >paddler. 91.3%. These are all using Sea Kayaker Magazines measurements 13' >5.25" and WL figures at the different weights (Note: except for a few >typos--that are a foot off--Sea Kayaker's published numbers are far more >accurate than from any other source I know of. I can't figure out where John >Winters got the measurements for the Coaster at 13' 6" long with a 12.31' >waterline. I assume he attempted to use the same gearload as the other >kayaks listed. >How about it John where did the Coaster data come from? The data comes from the calculated waterline length as returned by Nautilus. It automatically corrects actual Waterline length to its idea of effective waterline length and I will ask QCC to put that notation in their page. First time I had seen the page and the QCC boats show actual waterline length rather than the corrected waterline length so they seem longer than they should (relatively speaking). Thanks for pointing that out. I believe Sea kayaker measures actual waterline length so there should be some differences. Cheers, John Winters Redwing Designs Web site address, http://home.ican.net/~735769 *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
At 05:20 PM 7/27/99 -0700, M. Wagenbach wrote: >Wes wrote: >All the negative rake on the turn of the last century battleships was >because the bows were actually rams. The designers in those days weren't >all that confident about gunfire against armor, and designed the potential >for a ramming battle into the ships. > >Me: >Do you know if this was ever tested??? It's hard to imagine riveted >construction holding tight after being used to ram. Hope they included some >monster pumps in the design! > There was a battle in the Adriatic Sea in about 1878 -- the name escapes me at the moment -- in which Austria was involved, and I'm not too sure about the opponents. Anyway, it was the only battle of the metal warship era in which ramming was the basic tactic. I can't think off the top of my head of any case in which turn of the century era capital ships were involved in a ramming situation, although there are several instances of destroyer ramming submarine as late as WWII. The thing is that the late 1800s were a time of great change in naval capital ship design. There were a lot of ideas out there, a lot of new technology that navies were not necessarily on top of, and a lot of ideas that had to be proven or disproven. By the turn of the century, ramming was pretty well a dropped idea, but it took a while for the appearance to disappear from warship design. -- Wes *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
> >Wes wrote: > >All the negative rake on the turn of the last century battleships was > >because the bows were actually rams. The designers in those days weren't > >all that confident about gunfire against armor, and designed the potential > >for a ramming battle into the ships. > > I think Folbots may have been designed by some of those guys. I can think of no kayaks better suited for ramming than Folbots. Both of the singles and the double have heavy duty metal protective rails at the bow and stern. These rails start at the boat's end tips and wrap around and under to run along the keel about a foot. If a Folbot were to ram a fiberglass or kevlar kayak it would do it in. You also don't want to hit a Folbot in the stern with your kayak; you confront not only the metal wraparound rail but also all the sharp mechanism for the quite large rudder. And hitting Folbots amidship ain't going to do any damage to them. The air sponsons act as great bumpers to ward off blows. If you are ever around a Folbot that is backing up or manuevering to turn around, give it a wide berth. Who said that folding kayaks were delicate? :-) ralph diaz -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com "Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
I bought and old double Folbot and accidentally dropped a small screwdriver about a foot on the thin vinyl deck and it punched a hole right through it. Never trusted it enough to paddle it since. Matt Broze http://www.marinerkayaks.com -----Original Message----- From: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com <rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com> To: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net <paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net> Date: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 1:56 PM Subject: [Paddlewise] Rammming Re: QCC and length... >> >Wes wrote: >> >All the negative rake on the turn of the last century battleships was >> >because the bows were actually rams. The designers in those days weren't >> >all that confident about gunfire against armor, and designed the potential >> >for a ramming battle into the ships. >> > > >I think Folbots may have been designed by some of those guys. I can >think of no kayaks better suited for ramming than Folbots. Both of the >singles and the double have heavy duty metal protective rails at the bow >and stern. These rails start at the boat's end tips and wrap around and >under to run along the keel about a foot. If a Folbot were to ram a >fiberglass or kevlar kayak it would do it in. You also don't want to >hit a Folbot in the stern with your kayak; you confront not only the >metal wraparound rail but also all the sharp mechanism for the quite >large rudder. > >And hitting Folbots amidship ain't going to do any damage to them. The >air sponsons act as great bumpers to ward off blows. > >If you are ever around a Folbot that is backing up or manuevering to >turn around, give it a wide berth. Who said that folding kayaks were >delicate? :-) > >ralph diaz >-- >----------------------------------------------------------------------- >Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter >PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 >Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com >"Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." >----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >*************************************************************************** >PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List >Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net >Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net >Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ >*************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
But Matt, how much water can come in through a small screwdriver hole under the limited pressure of a small boat on top of the water like that. You could have kept it plugged by leaving the screwdriver in it, and maybe a little duct tape over it. Or just learned to enjoy the cooling provided by a little water. Next thing, we'll be hearing you extolling the virtues of fiberglass and possibly Kevlar. ;-) I couldn't resist. -Saul -----Original Message----- From: owner-paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net [mailto:owner-paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net]On Behalf Of Matt Broze Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 6:14 PM To: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Rammming Re: QCC and length... I bought and old double Folbot and accidentally dropped a small screwdriver about a foot on the thin vinyl deck and it punched a hole right through it. Never trusted it enough to paddle it since. Matt Broze http://www.marinerkayaks.com -----Original Message----- From: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com <rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com> To: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net <paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net> Date: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 1:56 PM Subject: [Paddlewise] Rammming Re: QCC and length... >> >Wes wrote: >> >All the negative rake on the turn of the last century battleships was >> >because the bows were actually rams. The designers in those days weren't >> >all that confident about gunfire against armor, and designed the potential >> >for a ramming battle into the ships. >> > > >I think Folbots may have been designed by some of those guys. I can >think of no kayaks better suited for ramming than Folbots. Both of the >singles and the double have heavy duty metal protective rails at the bow >and stern. These rails start at the boat's end tips and wrap around and >under to run along the keel about a foot. If a Folbot were to ram a >fiberglass or kevlar kayak it would do it in. You also don't want to >hit a Folbot in the stern with your kayak; you confront not only the >metal wraparound rail but also all the sharp mechanism for the quite >large rudder. > >And hitting Folbots amidship ain't going to do any damage to them. The >air sponsons act as great bumpers to ward off blows. > >If you are ever around a Folbot that is backing up or manuevering to >turn around, give it a wide berth. Who said that folding kayaks were >delicate? :-) > >ralph diaz >-- >----------------------------------------------------------------------- >Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter >PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 >Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com >"Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." >----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >*************************************************************************** >PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List >Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net >Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net >Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ >*************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ *************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Matt Broze wrote: > > I bought and old double Folbot and accidentally dropped a small screwdriver > about a foot on the thin vinyl deck and it punched a hole right through it. > Never trusted it enough to paddle it since. Lots of materials do age and become suspect. I have seen this happen with the cotton decks of Kleppers; and the plastic hulls of hardshells that have become so brittle that any banging starts fissures; same with the kevlar of composite boats. Once they go, they indeed are not to be trusted on the water and should be considered suspect. A new vinyl or cordura deck also can't be trusted. It may be as taut as a drum and bounce the screwdriver right back up and knock your eye out. Matt, when around a folding kayak, you may want to wear safety glasses. :-) ralph diaz -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com "Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:01 PDT